design document - department of foreign affairs and trade · bnpb plans to establish a national...
Post on 24-Jan-2020
2 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Design Document
Australia-Indonesia Facility for Disaster Reduction
1 January 2009 – 30 June 2013
page 1 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
CONTENTS page number ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 3
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4-6 2. STRATEGIC CONTEXT AND FEASIBILITY STUDY 7
2.1. INTRODUCTION 2.2. DEFINITION OF DISASTER REDUCTION 7-8 2.3. DISASTER MANAGEMENT IN THE REGION 8-9 2.4. DISASTERS IN ASIA ARE INCREASING 9-10 2.5. INCREASING REGIONAL VULNERABILITY 10-11 2.6. CONCLUSION 12
3. THE PROPOSAL 12 3.1. GOALS AND OUTCOMES 17 3.2. CRITICIAL SUCCESS FACTORS 17-22 3.3. WORK STREAMS 22-44
4. IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS 25
4.1. DELIVERY MECHANISMS 25 4.2. ESTIMATED BUDGET AND TIMING 26 4.3. MANAGEMENT AND GOVERNANCE ARRANGEMENTS AND STRUCTURE 26-27 4.4. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 29 4.5. MONITORING AND EVALUATION 30 4.6. SUSTAINABILITY 31
5. ANNEXES 32-36 5.1. GLOSSARY/DEFINITIONS 37-39 5.2. POSITION DESCRIPTIONS 5.3. TERMS OF REFERENCE 40-42 (JOINT MONITORING GROUP, EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE, IMPLEMENTATION AND TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP AND THE INTERNATIONAL ADVISORY PANEL) 5.4. HYOGO FRAMEWORK FOR ACTION 43
page 2 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
Acronyms and abbreviations APEC Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation AusAID Australian Agency for International Development ASEAN Association of South East Asian Nations HIV/AIDS Human Immunodeficiency Virus/ Acquired
Immunodeficiency Syndrome IFRC International Federation of Red Cross and Red
Crescent Societies OCHA United Nations Office for the Coordination of
Humanitarian Affairs SAARC South Asia Association for Regional Cooperation UN United Nations
page 3 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Asia region is disaster prone and there are a number of factors, including climate
change and increased urbanisation, which will see the frequency and severity of
disasters in the region continue to increase. At the same time, a number of organisations
or mechanisms are set up to assist in or provide for disaster management in the Asia
region. This emphasis on the organisation of external surge capacity to respond to
disasters is at odds with the strong desire in Asia to develop the capacity to self-manage
disasters. Moreover, professionals working in the disaster management area agree that
there is insufficient emphasis on disaster reduction.
In light of these observations, the Prime Minister of Australia and the President of
Indonesia have agreed to a Partnership for Regional Disaster Reduction which will
“comprise Australian and Indonesian collaboration on innovative scientific solutions and
forward-looking analysis to build more effective disaster mitigation, preparedness and
response in Asia, including through APEC and ASEAN”1. This Partnership will be
operationalised through an Australia-Indonesia Facility for Disaster Reduction (AIFDR).
The aspiration of the AIFDR is to promote a more disaster resilient Asia region and
reduce the human, social, economic and environmental impact of disasters in the region.
The goal for the first five years of the AIFDR is strengthened national and local capacity
in disaster management in Indonesia, and promotion of a more disaster resilient region.
During the five year period 2009 – 2014 there are five expected outcomes:
1. Good quality research and analysis will have been disseminated to those
responsible for disaster management in the country and the region to promote
better understanding of local and regional threats.
2. Improved risk and vulnerability information will be informing stakeholders’
disaster risk reduction decision making in priority areas in Indonesia and the
region.
3. At least 25% of disaster managers in Indonesia and five other countries will be
better prepared through having experience with exercises based on realistic
scenarios.
1 Australia Indonesia Partnership Joint Feasibility Study, Regional Centre for Disaster Relief and Coordination, October 2008. The full text of the study is available on the AusAID web site.
page 4 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
4. Partnership and cooperation with at least ten national and international disaster
management organizations will have been established successfully.
5. In partnership with selected tertiary education institutions, an institute for
disaster reduction will be established, accessible and internationally recognised
as a provider of tertiary level training in disaster management and will be
training at least 500 managers per year.
Efforts to achieve the AIFDR goal and outcomes will occur in three linked work streams:
research and analysis; risk and vulnerability; and training and outreach.
The research and analysis work stream: will deliver high-quality, prioritised
research relevant to the AIFDR goal and outcomes and focused on emerging
regional threats in Asia. Its work will also include policy and organisational
research and will facilitate access to scholarships for study at technical, graduate
and post-graduate level that will help develop a cadre of professional disaster
managers in the region.
The risk and vulnerability work stream: will use world class science to quantify
hazards in Indonesia and Asia and compute risk based on exposure and
vulnerability. Expertise for this work will be provided by Geoscience Australia in
collaboration with other technical organisations in Indonesia and the region.
The training and outreach work stream: will deliver targeted and high-quality
training through the collaborative identification of priority training needs,
engagement of the best and most appropriate expertise to develop customised
training packages and provision of a venue and training mechanisms. This work
stream will also assist the Co-Directors to scope the development of a dedicated
Australia-Indonesia Centre for Regional Disaster Reduction that will complement
BNPB plans to establish a national centre and regional centres for capacity
building in disaster management. It will provide high-standard, progressive
professional learning for disaster managers and access to tertiary level courses
through strategic partnerships with universities in Indonesia, Australia and the
broader Asia region.
Six factors critical to achieving the AIFDR goal and outcomes have been identified and
include:
page 5 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
1. The fostering of relationships with and between the numerous other regional
DRR focused agencies;
2. The appropriate direction of AIFDR’s efforts towards identified gaps in DRR
capacity in Indonesia and the Asia region;
3. Working with appropriate people to build national capacity to self-manage
disaster reduction and management
4. Focusing on disaster risk reduction
5. The alignment of the AIFDR work program with existing international agreements
and Indonesian and Australian Government Policies;
6. Integration of the AIFDR’s work streams.
The design of the AIFDR is flexible. Its work programs will be developed annually by
AIFDR staff. These will be reviewed and amended by a senior level Executive
Committee with Indonesian and Australian members. The committee will be supported
by an Implementation and Technical Working Group that will provide more detailed
oversight and guidance, Further support will be provided by annual visits from a two
person Joint Monitoring Group and an independent International Advisory Panel.
AIFDR will focus on disaster risk reduction and offer world-class expertise in disaster
preparedness and mitigation and risk and vulnerability assessment. Its proposed
development into the Australia-Indonesia Centre for Regional Disaster Reduction. and its
collaboration with other disaster management organisations or international donors will
enable it to grow and respond to emerging issues in the region.
A scheduled review of the operations of the AIFDR at the end of its first two years of
operation will judge its success against its objectives, as well as judging its potential for
further expansion. Its success will be significantly dependent on the degree to which it
has been able to embed itself as a first class provider of advice, training, skills, analysis
and expertise in disaster risk reduction to national disaster managers.
page 6 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
2. STRATEGIC CONTEXT AND FEASIBILITY STUDY
2.1. INTRODUCTION
Following a visit to Indonesia by the Australian Prime Minister, the Hon Kevin Rudd MP
in June 2008, a Feasibility Study was commissioned by Prime Minister Rudd and the
President of Indonesia Dr Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, on the establishment of a
regional centre for disaster relief coordination.
Prime Minister Rudd and President Yudhoyono announced at APEC on 22 November
2008 that Australia and Indonesia would establish the Australia-Indonesia Disaster
Reduction Facility (AIFDR) in Jakarta, to be operational from April 2009. This design
document is based on the findings of the Feasibility Study2 which informed their decision
and subsequent consultation with the Government of Indonesia, donors and UN
Agencies during a Design Mission in Jakarta from 19-30 January 2009.
2.2. DEFINITION OF DISASTER RISK REDUCTION
Given widespread ambiguity and varied usage of the term Disaster Risk Reduction
(DRR) in the international community, it is critical to clearly define this term. In this
document DRR is defined as:
“the reduction of disaster risks and adverse impacts of natural hazards, through
systematic efforts to analyse and manage the causes of disasters, including
through avoidance of hazards, reduced social and economic vulnerability to
hazards, and improved preparedness for adverse events”.3
Under the UN-ISDR definition, DRR encompasses efforts to:
foster or support prioritisation and coordination of disaster risk reduction
build knowledge of natural hazard risks and communicate this information
create and improve early warning systems
promote education and awareness raising about disaster risk
2 Australia Indonesia Partnership Joint Feasibility Study, Regional Centre for Disaster Relief and Coordination, October 2008. The full text of the study is available on the AusAID web site. 3 Definition from the UN International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR)
page 7 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
mitigate the impacts of natural hazards through activities such as livelihood
diversification, structural mitigation, environmental protection and natural
resource management and climate change adaptation.
strengthen disaster preparedness, including the creation and upkeep of
contingency, emergency response and evacuation plans and standby
arrangements for stores and goods necessary for emergency response.
2.3. DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT4 IN THE REGION
Recent reviews of disaster risk management (DRM) in Asia5, including the Feasibility
Study referred to above, have found that, in spite of there being at least fifty
organisations and programs active in the region that aim to assist with disaster
preparedness and response, the humanitarian sector has been slow to react and adapt
to new challenges. Frequent large scale disasters have led to an overemphasis on
response and a preoccupation with building surge capacity within international and
regional organisations rather than assisting national organisations. There are ongoing
challenges in coordinating response efforts, such as the large number of actors with
varying degrees of capacity.
Critically, there has been insufficient focus on DRR and building national capability to
self-manage disasters. DRR measures cannot be effectively implemented and sustained
unless there is national capability. Well organised and managed local response is
quicker and more effective than external response. In addition, countries with better
disaster management capacity are better able to lead and manage external assistance
should it be required. This is the area where there is real potential to deliver benefits with
an opportunity for Indonesia and Australia to work with the humanitarian sector to ensure
more resources are effectively allocated to risk reduction, and organisational and
management capacity.
4 The UNISDR define Disaster Risk Management as: The systematic process of using administrative decisions, organization, operational skills and capacities to implement policies, strategies and coping capacities of the society and communities to lessen the impacts of natural hazards and related environmental and technological disasters. This comprises all forms of activities, including structural and non-structural measures to avoid (prevention) or to limit (mitigation and preparedness) adverse effects of hazards. 5 See for example: Tsunami Evaluation Coalition Synthesis Report, July 2006; and, UNOCHA Yogyakarta and Central Java Earthquake , Indonesia, Cluster Approach, Lessons Learned, January 2007
page 8 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
Disaster risk reduction has significant economic benefits. The World Bank estimates that
for each dollar invested in disaster risk reduction, five to ten dollars are saved in avoided
or reduced disaster impacts. Reducing disasters, limiting their impact when they occur
and better equipping countries to self-manage events will save lives, decrease
burgeoning response costs, safeguard development gains and empower communities.
RISK REDUCTION SAVES LIVES
Cyclone Sidr that hit Bangladesh in November 2007 was similar to Cyclone Nargis, the cyclone
that devastated much of Burma on 2 May 2008. Yet the impacts from these events are worlds
apart – Bangladesh lost 3,000 people while it is estimated that Burma had more than 100,000
deaths.
With similar Human Development Index rankings, similar poverty levels and similar annual GDP,
the lives and vulnerabilities of Burmese and Bangladeshi communities living on extensive coastal
tributary systems are remarkably alike. Why then did similar cyclone events affecting similar
communities result in strikingly different disasters?
The answer: Bangladesh has incorporated early warning systems, mitigation measures and
community preparedness activities into its development program, and Burma has not. The risk of
natural disasters affecting the millions of poor people along the Bangladesh coastline has been
vastly reduced by the actions of the Government in partnership with international agencies and
donors such as Australia
2.4. DISASTERS IN ASIA ARE INCREASING
Natural disasters affect the lives of millions of people in the world every year. In 2007,
there were 405 natural disasters, affecting over 201 million people6. The Asia-Pacific
region suffers more from natural disasters than any other region in the world. Indeed, the
number of disasters affecting Asia has outnumbered those in other continents every year
since 1998.
Globally, since 1975, the number of natural disasters has increased from fewer than 100
6 IFRC 2008, World Disasters Report.
page 9 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
to more than 400 a year7. This is accompanied by a rapid increase in socio-economic
losses caused by natural disasters and in the number of people affected—on average
250 million people a year, up by more than 30 per cent in just a decade8. Further to this,
there is a growing body of evidence that climate change will contribute to even more
frequent and intensive disasters, with severe consequences on the food security and
livelihoods of agriculture-dependent populations in vulnerable countries.
2.5. INCREASING REGIONAL VULNERABILITY
Poverty, exclusion and inequality all play their part in increasing vulnerability to natural
hazards9. It is this vulnerability that determines whether an event such as an
earthquake, typhoon or drought becomes a disaster. In seeking to reduce disaster risk
in the region, it is important to understand the key drivers behind populations’ increasing
vulnerability to natural disasters. The main causes include underdevelopment,
population gro
wth and urbanisation.
bal
Extreme geophysical events and the changing dynamic of crises
The 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami affected 11 countries directly and killed over 220,000
people from more than 50 countries. Scientists suggest that other potential extreme
events will have equal or much greater effect.10 Indeed predictions have been made
that future disasters will be more prone to cascade into others, with regional and glo
impacts including global economic crises; millions of deaths; catastrophic and
irrecoverable destruction of megacities and even whole countries; global disruption of
food supplies, transport and communications; and environmental pollution.11
Simultaneous failures or collapse of survival systems, including economic systems,
would severely threaten urban communities in particular.
The world’s population is rapidly increasing, and is becoming more concentrated in
urban areas. Population growth is occurring predominantly in countries with limited
7 World Bank 2006, Hazards of Nature, Risks to Development 8 The IFRC. 2007, Climate Guide. http://www.ifrc.org/Docs/pubs/disasters/resources/about-disasters/climate-guide.pdf 9 Oxfam International – Rethinking Disasters: Why death and destruction is not nature’s fault but human failure (p.i) 10 Huppert, H & Sparks, S 2006, Extreme natural hazards: population growth, globalization and environmental change.
Philosophical Transactions of The Royal Society, 364, pp. 1875–1888. 11 Ibid.
page 10 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
capacity to enforce land-use regulations and the appropriate building codes needed to
mitigate the impact of natural hazards. The advent of megacities (cities with more than
10 million inhabitants) often located in areas vulnerable to earthquakes, the spread of
urban development onto marginal coastal and flood plain land and decaying
infrastructure, all pose formidable challenges to political leaders and their disaster
managers.
Geoscience Australia, as part of its study Assessing natural hazard risk in the Asia-
Pacific Region, concluded that there is great potential for natural disasters to seriously
affect more than one million people in the region. This could include: 12
megacities in the Himalayan Belt, China, Indonesia and the Philippines which are
prime candidates for catastrophic earthquakes
volcanic disasters which could occur at least once a decade in Indonesia and
once every few decades in the Philippines
a tsunami, flood or cyclone event in the mega-deltas of Asia (for example,
Bangladesh) affecting this region’s rapidly increasing populations who already
have an increasing vulnerability because of climate change
Population growth is occurring predominantly in countries with limited capacity to enforce
land-use regulations and the appropriate building codes needed to mitigate the impact of
natural disasters. Mitigation and preparedness activities are critical not only for high-
impact events but also for lower-impact but high frequency events (such as annual
flooding in South Asia) which continue to push vulnerable people further into poverty.
Underdevelopment
The World Bank (2008) reports that over 95 per cent of people killed in natural disasters
are from developing countries. As the poorest people in developing countries have the
least capacity to reduce their vulnerability, they are often the worst affected. Poor
communities are often ‘pushed’ into marginal, hazard prone locations such as flood or
landslide affected areas. Housing and community buildings in these areas are often
substandard and cannot withstand ground shaking from earthquakes or heavy winds
12 Simpson, A; Schneider, J; Cummins, P; Leigh, R; Griffin, J & Dhu, T 2008, Assessing Natural Hazard Risk in the Asia Pacific Region. Proceedings of the 34th International Geological Congress, Oslo Norway.
page 11 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
and rain from typhoons. Livelihood opportunities for these people can often be limited
and are thus vulnerable to being destroyed by a single disaster. As vulnerable
communities increasingly face the impacts of climate change - changing rainfall and
agriculture patterns, rising food and fuel prices and environmental degradation - their
capacity to cope with disasters is further eroded.
2.6. CONCLUSION
Faced with growing vulnerabilities, and the prospect of increasingly frequent and severe
natural hazards, it is critical that national governments in Asia reduce their disaster risk
and build their disaster risk management capabilities. In spite of the large number of
organisations active in the DRR field, there is a clear case for the allocation of more
resources to improving disaster risk reduction measures and building national capability
to prepare for and manage disasters. Just as importantly, more needs to be done to
coordinate efforts in the region across the whole spectrum of disaster risk reduction
which highlights the importance of establishing and nurturing partnerships between the
many players and stakeholders in the region.
3. THE PROPOSAL
The Prime Minister of Australia and the President of Indonesia are committed to
improving disaster risk management in the Asia region and agree that Australia and
Indonesia, working together, can contribute best by concentrating on disaster risk
reduction.
Australia and Indonesia have, therefore, entered into a Partnership for Regional Disaster
Reduction. The Feasibility study agreed that “The Partnership would comprise
Australian and Indonesian collaboration on innovative scientific solutions and forward-
looking analysis to build more effective disaster mitigation, preparedness and response
in Asia, including through APEC and ASEAN”.
The Partnership will be operationalised through an Australia-Indonesia Facility for
Disaster Reduction (AIFDR). This will be located in Jakarta to take full advantage of the
page 12 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
strong relationship established between Indonesia and Australia following the 2004
tsunami and in recognition of the fact that Indonesia is one of the most disaster prone
nations in the Asia region. The AIFDR will help develop more effective DRR in Asia,
including through regional bodies such as APEC and ASEAN, by delivering three
closely linked work streams which will provide targeted and appropriate:
scientific research to ascertain risk and vulnerability to natural disasters in the
Asia region;
training needs assessments, training and capacity building, including simulation
exercises, for DRR priorities in Indonesia and the Asia Region; and
forward thinking research and analysis on Asia specific DRR issues.
The AIFDR will have an initial focus on supporting and developing DRR capacity in
Indonesia with a rapidly expanding focus to support DRR initiatives in the broader Asia
region. In their joint media release the President of Indonesia and the Australian Prime
Minister stated that “Australia and Indonesia will develop and sustain the Facility’s
relationship and collaboration with ASEAN, ASEAN Regional Forum, APEC, SAARC, the
United Nations, the Red Cross/Red Crescent movement and regional disaster
management mechanisms and programs”. The AIFDR’s expansion to support regional
initiatives will require the AIFDR to immediately begin developing a strategy for engaging
with existing regional mechanisms such as APEC and ASEAN. The following table,
taken from the Feasibility Study, identifies the organisations the Facility will aim to assist
together with some brief information on potential avenues for support.
page 13 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
WHO The products and services offered by the Facility will be available to a wide range of regional partners, including national governments, NGOs, inter-governmental entities, United Nations and the Red Cross Movement. The Australian-Indonesia experience will be available to ASEAN and APEC institutions with cooperative links forged across Asia.
INDONESIA ASEAN APEC ASIA Build Indonesian capacity at the national and provincial level and enhance ability to extend experience to the egion: r
Assist implementation of
the new Disaster Management Law 24/2007
Build Indonesia impact assessment capacity
Leverage Indonesia experience into the region
Support emerging BNPB role in regional/international DM sector
Increased dialogue with the ASEAN Secretariat to establish program of support to: a
(a) ASEAN Regional Programme on Disaster Management: Support for ASEAN’s role
in regional HFA implementation; and
Support implementation of the priority areas of the AADMER identified by the Secretariat
(b) ASEAN AHA Centre: Assist development of
ASEAN Emergency Response and Assessment Teams;
Provision of equipment/technology to enhance AHA’s deployable capability.
Linking of AHA Centre to national centres
Maintain a dialogue with the APEC Task Force for Emergency Preparedness (Australia and Indonesia are co-chairs): Make Facility
learning and experience available to TFEP
Stimulate public-private sector partnerships to expand resources and innovation for disaster reduction, including leveraging private sector management and experience
Support TFEP activities, as appropriate (eg: disaster impact assessment training)
Expand links into non-ASEAN Asia to provide disaster reduction and disaster management assistance and knowledge Share results and
extend tools and services administered by the Australia-Indonesia Facility to governments, UN agencies, NGO and other organisations in the region.
Establish networks and linkages with other global and regional disaster management institutions and mechanisms in Asia
Concurrent with the AIFDR’s operations, Australia and Indonesia will develop the scope
and nature of a dedicated Australia-Indonesia Centre for Regional Disaster Reduction,
that will provide access to high-standard, progressive, professional training for disaster
managers. The Centre will provide access to tertiary level courses through strategic
partnerships with existing tertiary institutions in Indonesia, Australia and the broader Asia
region. It will be set up to complement BNPB plans to establish a national centre and at
least three regional centres for capacity building in disaster management. The Centre
will also continue to provide, and possibly expand the three linked work streams of the
AIFDR and would build on and maintain cooperative partnerships with other countries in
Asia and potentially the Pacific.
The AIFDR will have many opportunities and challenges and in recognition of this there
will be a review after the first two years of operation. The initial phase of the AIFDR will
cover the period April 2009 to June 2014 and in the first half of 2011 there will be a
review of progress upon which the future direction of the AIFDR will be determined,
page 14 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
page 15 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
particularly in regard to the establishment of the Australia-Indonesia Centre for Regional
Disaster Reduction.
The aims and objectives of the AIFDR and the vision for its operations are set out in this
document and the figure on the following page provides a diagrammatic representation.
Details of yearly work programs and their intended outputs will be the responsibility of
the AIFDR staff once the AIFDR is operational. Moreover, one of the first requirements
of the AIFDR will be to assist BNPB, in collaboration with the World Bank, UNDP and
perhaps others, to conduct a comprehensive needs analysis for DRM in Indonesia that
will inform and direct the AIFDR’s initial work plan. This recognises the need for a
carefully planned and consultative approach to ensure that the AIFDR’s resources are
directed to high priority initiatives that are aligned with the AIFDR’s capabilities and
stated Goals and Outcomes. It also enables clear and measurable objectives to be set
for yearly programs and provides the management committees and senior AIFDR staff
with scope and flexibility to plan operations in a current context.
Scoping and development of the Australia-Indonesia Centre for Disaster Reduction as a dedicated, Objective 1professional tertiar q alifiedStrengthened Disaster preparedness for effective response and
areas in Indonesia and Asia. increased capability in disaster risk management in priority
Expected Outcomes by end 2014
1. Good quality research and analysis will have been disseminated to those responsible for disaster management in the country and the region to
promote better understanding of local and regional threats.
2. Improved risk and vulnerability information will be informing stakeholders’ disaster management decision making in priority areas in Indonesia
and the region.
3. At least 25% of disaster managers in Indonesia and five other countries will be better prepared through having experience with exercises
based on realistic scenarios.
4. Partnership and cooperation with at least ten national and international disaster management organizations will have been established
successfully
5. In partnership with selected tertiary education institutions, an institute for disaster reduction will be established, accessible and internationally
recognised as a provider of tertiary level training in disaster management and will be training at least 500 managers per year.
ge 16 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09 pa
Work streams
Research and Analysis
Conduct baseline analysis and identify gaps in DRR research Commission research to fill the identified gaps Disseminate research outcomes within Facility and to the wider stakeholders
Risk and Vulnerability Develop methodologies and appropriate techniques for hazard risk analysis based on identified priorities Strengthen national and regional capability for hazard risk analysis. Share analysis within facility and to the wider stakeholders to improve planning, training and exercising.
Training and Outreach Based on a needs analysis, develop and assist in providing training and outreach activities to support improved DRM. Exercise contingency plans using realistic scenarios based on risk assessments produced by the Risk and Vulnerability work stream
Goal
Strengthened national and local capacity in disaster management in Indonesia, and promotion of a more
disaster resilient region.
3.1. GOAL AND OUTCOMES
The aspiration of the AIFDR is to promote a more disaster resilient Asia region and
reduce the human, social, economic and environmental impact of disasters in the region.
The goal for the first five years of the AIFDR is strengthened national and local capacity
in disaster management in Indonesia, and promotion of a more disaster resilient region.
During the five year period 2009 – 2014 there are five expected outcomes:
1. Good quality research and analysis will have been disseminated to those
responsible for disaster management in the country and the region to promote
better understanding of local and regional threats.
2. Improved risk and vulnerability information will be informing stakeholders’ disaster
risk reduction decision making in priority areas in Indonesia and the region.
3. At least 25% of disaster managers in Indonesia and five other countries will be
better prepared through having experience with exercises based on realistic
scenarios.
4. Partnership and cooperation with at least ten national and international disaster
management organizations will have been established successfully.
5. In partnership with selected tertiary education institutions, an institute for disaster
reduction will be established, accessible and internationally recognised as a
provider of tertiary level training in disaster management and will be training at
least 500 managers per year.
3.2 CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS
Six factors are critical to the success of the AIFDR:
page 17 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
1. The fostering of relationships with and between the numerous other regional
DRR focused agencies
It is important to recognise and acknowledge that the AIFDR will not be operating
in isolation and that there are numerous other groups who have an interest or are
already working in this space. The AIFDR’s success will come from identifying
how its expertise can complement and support existing programs in the region.
This will be achieved by fostering effective working relations among many
players, developing partnerships and sharing expertise. A Partnerships Manager
and a small team will support the work of all three work streams (see Section 3.3)
by helping to identify potential partners and facilitating contact and creating
necessary partnership agreements.
The commitment of the two national leaders, their explicit linking of the AIFDR to
ASEAN and APEC and the AIFDR’s Jakarta location will greatly assist with the
successful brokering of relationships. International involvement in AIFDR
management, especially through the proposed International Advisory Panel will
also contribute significantly.
2. The appropriate direction of AIFDR’s efforts towards identified gaps in DRR
capacity in Indonesia and the Asia region.
In order to succeed the AIFDR must ensure that its work is well directed towards
building capacity. To achieve this, the first step will be a comprehensive,
collaborative needs analysis for DRR in Indonesia and the development of a road
map for achieving progress. This will cover the whole spectrum of needs from
national to local level. Following this analysis, the AIFDR will need to develop a
similar road map that outlines its strategy for supporting DRR in the Asia region.
It is important to recognise that the AIFDR will not be able to address all of the
gaps that are identified in Indonesia and the Asia region. However, the proposed
road maps can support strategic partnerships and coordination with other
page 18 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
Indonesian organisations, regional governments, regional bodies, donors and UN
Agencies.
3. Working with appropriate people to build national capacity to self-manage
disaster reduction and management.
A country that has adopted a disaster reduction approach will be better able to
lead and manage external assistance should it ever be required. One of the key
mechanisms for achieving this in Indonesia will be to work with, and actively
develop, Indonesian DRR expertise through partnerships, training and
collaborative research. The AIFDR will seek to not only commission and conduct
research and training using Indonesian and regional expertise, but will also seek
to transfer expertise to Indonesian and regional counterparts whenever
appropriate.
Ensuring the AIFDR is working with the people who have the greatest potential to
improve national capacity, and that such people can be available, is very
challenging. The challenge must be addressed at both the national and sub-
national levels to ensure target communities are involved. AusAID programs
already working with organisations such as NU and Muhammadiyah will
complement this effort. Senior level support and political commitment for the work
of the AIFDR will greatly assist in addressing this challenge.
A specific factor in achieving success in building national capacity will be the
integration of women in decision-making and leadership and by providing
adequate services and training to women. The involvement of women in
disaster-risk-management decision making in itself reduces the risk of disasters.
As part of the AIFDR’s Training and Outreach activities there will be equal
engagement and capacity building/training opportunities for women as for men.
Training of Disaster Reduction Managers will emphasise the involvement of both
women and men in preparedness and mitigation for best outcomes. In the Risk
and Vulnerability work stream, the AIFDR will seek to engage with recognised
senior female scientists as well as more junior female scientists. Finally, the
AIFDR will also seek to recruit equal proportions of male and female staff and
page 19 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
endeavour to provide learning and development opportunities equally for men
and women.
4. Focusing on disaster risk reduction
Disaster risk reduction is the entry point for the AIFDR and provides an
opportunity for the AIFDR to establish its credibility and identity, but distraction
from reduction into an operational response is a real possibility if a major disaster
occurs. It needs to be recognised that in Asia, disaster preparedness and
response architecture is centred on individual state responsibility. A premature
attempt by the AIFDR to support any operational response before it was well
established could end up simply adding to the already crowded and incoherent
space and severely dilute its DRR efforts and reputation.
A focus on disaster reduction, at both the national and sub-national levels, shifts
effort from reactively responding to the humanitarian consequences of
‘unexpected’ events to a stable, strategic and cost effective focus on reducing
vulnerabilities before an event and speeding recovery.
5. The alignment of the AIFDR work program with existing international
agreements and Indonesian and Australian Government Policies
The AIFDR will ensure that its work program is aligned with the following:
The Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA)
The HFA was adopted by 168 countries in January 2005 at the UN World
Conference on Disasters in Kobe, Japan. The Hyogo Framework outlines a
commitment to a substantial reduction of disaster losses, in lives as well as the
social, economic and environmental assets of communities and countries and
lays five priorities to achieve this13. The AIFDR’s activities will specifically seek to
address:
o Priority 2 – Identify, assess and monitor disaster risks and enhance
early warning;
13 Further details on the HFA can be found in Annex 5.5
page 20 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
o Priority 3 – Use knowledge, innovation and education to build a
culture of safety and resilience at all levels; and
o Priority 5 – Strengthen disaster preparedness for effective response
at all levels.
The Jakarta Commitment
Together with a number of other international agencies, on 12 January 2009 the
Australian Government agreed to adopt the Jakarta Commitment. The
commitment requires Australia to comply with the Indonesia Roadmap to
strengthen aid for development effectiveness. The Roadmap sets out a number
of policies that donors are asked to follow in the delivery of aid. These are in line
with the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness.
The ASEAN Agreement on Disaster Management and Emergency Response
This agreement outlines how the Hyogo Framework can be implemented in
Southeast Asia.
The Indonesian National Action Plan for Disaster Preparedness and Risk
Reduction (NAP-DPRR) or RAN-PRB 2006-2009
The plan outlines five key priorities for disaster risk reduction that are closely
aligned with the five priorities of the Hyogo Framework for Action. In particular,
RAN-PRB outlines a requirement for risk assessment at national and local scales
and that institutional capacities, required to research, observe, analyse, map and
forecast natural hazards, vulnerabilities and disaster impacts, are supported.
Furthermore the RAN-PRB notes that improved methods should be developed
for predictive multi-risk assessments and socio-economic cost-benefit analysis of
risk reduction actions.
Existing and future AusAID strategies and policies
Currently, these are: the Australia – Indonesia Country Strategy 2008 – 2011;
Disaster Risk Reduction Policy (under development); Gender Policy (2007);
Environment Policy (2007); Health Policy (2006); and Better Education Policy
(2007).
page 21 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
6. Integration of the AIFDR’s work streams
As is set out below, the AIFDR will have three work streams. They are designed
to work coherently. If the AIFDR fails to capture the synergies between the three
streams, if the whole is not greater than the sum of its parts, the AIFDR will not
realise its objectives fully.
It will be incumbent on all Managers and the AIFDR Director to work on
maintaining the coherence of AIFDR’s work streams so that each supports the
other and they are focussed on collaboratively achieving the AIFDR’s goals.
3.3 WORK STREAMS
The AIFDR will have three linked work streams with a team of appropriate staff assigned
to each. Each team will be lead by a program manager.
3.3.1 Descriptions
The Research and Analysis work stream will deliver high-quality, prioritised research
relevant to the AIFDR goal and outcomes and focused on emerging regional threats in
Asia. Annual research priorities will be determined by AIFDR’s Executive Committee
upon the advice of the International Advisory Board, the Implementation and Technical
Working Group (see section 4.3 for more details on these advisory and management
structures) and the AIFDR Co-Directors. Their advice will take into account existing high
quality research that is relevant to the Facility’s goals and proposed outcomes.
Research will be produced through engagement with academic and research institutions
in the region with an emphasis on accessing the region’s best and brightest. It will aim
to inform more effective efforts to reduce disaster risk, to promote broad understanding
at senior management and political levels of the importance of DRR and will be targeted
to underpin work in the other work streams. For instance, it will include policy and
organisational research that will also seek to improve capacity to undertake such
research in Indonesian and Asian institutions. In addition, the Executive Committee may
be asked to consider the creation of a competitive funding stream available for
page 22 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
innovative research proposals that are aligned with the AIFDR’s goal but are not
captured in annual priorities.
The Research and Analysis work stream will also facilitate access to scholarships for
study at technical, graduate and post-graduate level that will help develop a cadre of
professional disaster managers in the region. Selection of research work by post-
graduate scholars will be informed by the needs identified in the Risk and Vulnerability
work stream.
The Risk and Vulnerability work stream will be delivered through the provision of
world class science to quantify hazards in Indonesia and Asia and compute risk based
on exposure and vulnerability. Expertise for this work will be provided by Geoscience
Australia in collaboration with other technical organisations in Indonesia and the region.
This work stream will employ two strategies to support the AIFDR’s goal and outcomes.
Firstly, the risk and vulnerability work stream will provide a capacity to generate realistic
natural hazard scenarios to support preparedness activities at local, national, and
regional levels. This capability will be utilised by the AIFDR’s training and outreach work
stream as well as other initiatives in Indonesia and the Asia region.
Secondly, this work stream will develop a longer-term program to understand natural
hazard risks. This will be focused on developing information fundamental to
development of preparedness and mitigation strategies. In addition, this will support the
prioritisation of DRR investments, for example through the refinement of national scale
risk assessments to support the Indonesian Medium Term Development Plan and
National Action Plan for Disaster Risk Reduction. In this way the AIFDR will support the
mainstreaming of DRR into regular development programs.
In all its work the risk and vulnerability work stream will seek to improve the capacity of
Indonesian and regional experts to carry out this scientific work in the future. In addition
to this, it will contribute to regional mechanisms and initiatives by participating in
appropriate regional and international forums.
page 23 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
The Training and Outreach work stream will be delivered by engaging the best
Indonesian, Australian and international expertise. The AIFDR will:
collaboratively identify priority training needs;
engage the best and most appropriate expertise to develop customised training
packages; and
provide a venue and mechanism to deliver this training.
Given this approach, the first priority for this work stream will be to facilitate a
comprehensive needs analysis for disaster risk management in Indonesia followed by
the development of a road map to address these needs. It should cover all levels of
capacity development, including policy, organisation and individual skills.
In addition to addressing the priority needs of DRM in Indonesia, the AIFDR will also
provide Australia and Indonesia an opportunity to showcase their expertise in DRR to
the Asia region. This will require the training and outreach work stream and the
partnerships manager to develop a strategy for engaging with regional mechanisms such
as ASEAN and APEC. There is an expectation that the AIFDR will begin to have a
regional role within its first two years and prior to the review in 2011. In particular, there
may be opportunities for the AIFDR to support the Indonesian government in the
establishment of an operational ASEAN Co-ordinating Centre for Humanitarian
Assistance on disaster management (the AHA Centre),
Under this work stream AIFDR staff will also assist the Co-Directors to scope the
development of high-standard, professional learning progression for disaster managers
culminating in tertiary-accredited qualification and the establishment of a dedicated
Australia-Indonesia Centre for Regional Disaster Reduction. The Centre, which will be
developed to complement BNPB plans to set up a national centre and regional centres
for capacity building in disaster management, will provide access to tertiary level courses
through strategic partnerships with universities in Australia, Indonesia and the broader
Asia region.
page 24 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
4. IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS
4.1 DELIVERY MECHANISMS
4.1.1 AIFDR Establishment and Management
The Jakarta-based AIFDR will be housed, equipped and staffed by Indonesia and
Australia with grant funding from AusAID. AusAID will procure the premises and all
necessary equipment. Agreement between Australia and Indonesia will be necessary for
all recruitment the AIFDR. Once this agreement is in place, staff will be contracted to
AusAID.
The AIFDR will be led by two Co-Directors, one each from Australia and Indonesia. The
Co-Directors will be assisted by a Partnerships Manager who will be responsible for
assisting all AIFDR staff with the building of partnerships with key Indonesian, Australian
and regional players. (See Annex 5.2 for Position Descriptions).
The Risk and Vulnerability work stream will be largely delivered by Australia-based staff
from Geoscience Australia, transferred to AusAID for this purpose and supported by
Indonesian staff recruited in Jakarta. This work stream will work collaboratively with
existing expertise in Indonesia and the region. Geoscience Australia will also provide
support for the AIFDR from their head office in Canberra and a Record of Understanding
will be developed which clearly articulates the type and extent of each party’s
contributions to the AIFDR.
Managers and staff for the other two work streams will be specifically recruited. For the
delivery of these work streams, a variety of mechanisms will be employed to
collaboratively identify and access the best and most appropriate Indonesian, regional
and international expertise. For the Training and Outreach work stream, the selection of
expertise will be heavily influenced by comprehensive needs analyses that will be
conducted within one year of the AIFDR’s establishment.
page 25 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
4.2 ESTIMATED BUDGET AND TIMING
The estimated cost of the AIFDR over five years is $67 million. Exact cost and payment
schedules for each year will follow the development of consolidated annual work plans
each year.
4.3 MANAGEMENT AND GOVERNANCE ARRANGEMENTS AND STRUCTURE
An Executive Committee will oversight AIFDR management and provide the AIFDR with
strategic policy guidance. The Executive Committee will also formally approve the
AIFDR’s annual work programs. The co-chairs of the Executive Committee will be a
senior BNPB representative and the senior AusAID representative in Indonesia. Its
members will include senior representatives of BAPPENAS, DEPLU, DFAT and
Geoscience Australia. The Executive Committee will aim to meet quarterly, with the first
meeting occurring prior to the scheduled opening of the AIFDR in April 2009.
An Implementation and Technical Working (ITW) Group will provide more detailed
technical oversight and guidance. In particular, the Group will provide guidance to the
AIFDR on the development of work programs and advice to the Executive Committee on
these work programs. The Deputy of Prevention and Preparedness at BNPB will chair
this group. Membership will include, as a minimum, an Indonesian scientific
representative and representatives of Geoscience Australia and AusAID. Other
Government agencies and experts, including from participating UN/regional agencies,
will be invited as necessary to consider agenda items that fall within their areas of
responsibility or expertise. The ITW Group will aim to meet monthly, or more regularly if
necessary. The ITW Group will hold its first meeting as soon as possible in 2009.
There will be an independent International Advisory Panel established to advise the
Executive Committee and the Co-Directors. It is planned that a senior international
disaster risk reduction official will chair this Committee and there will be three senior
expert members. The Committee will meet once per year in Jakarta and secretarial
services will be provided by the AIFDR. One of the roles of this Committee will be to
advise on annual priorities for the research and analysis work stream.
page 26 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
page 27 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
The AIFDR will provide secretariat services to the Executive Committee, the ITW Group
and the International Advisory Panel. Terms of Reference for all three are at Annex 5.3.
The management of the AIFDR will be the responsibility of the Australian and Indonesian
AIFDR Co-Directors. They will be assisted by the Partnerships Manager and the
Managers of the three work streams. The AIFDR Co-Directors will be accountable to
the Executive Committee for their performance. However, for most performance
assessment exercises and on a day-to-day basis the Australian AIFDR Director will be
accountable to the senior AusAID representative in Indonesia and the Indonesian AIFDR
Director will be accountable to the head of BNPB. The Australian AIFDR Director, with
input as required from the Indonesian AIFDR Director, will be ultimately responsible for
the performance management of other AIFDR staff.
While the AIFDR will be largely self-managing with minimal support required from
AusAID’s Jakarta or Canberra offices, there will be some requirement for ongoing
involvement by AusAID. The senior AusAID representative in Jakarta will have an
ongoing role as a member of the Executive Committee and the line manager of the
Australian AIFDR Director. In addition, AusAID’s Jakarta office will take responsibility for
the deployment of all Australian staff in the AIFDR. It will also be important that AusAID
maintain appropriate engagement with the AIFDR to ensure ongoing congruence of
program implementation policies and practices, especially in terms of the AusAID DRR
Policy and the AusAID Indonesian Disaster Management Strategy, and to facilitate the
senior AusAID representative’s participation in the Executive Committee. The senior
AusAID representative in Jakarta will therefore identify an appropriate officer under his
supervision to maintain liaison with the AIFDR. This officer will serve on the ITW Group.
The senior staffing structure of the AIFDR and their responsibilities are detailed in the
following diagram.
Executive Committee International Advisory
Panel Joint Monitoring
Group Implementation and Technical Working Group
GoA Facility Co-Director
GoI Facility Co-Director
Training and Outreach
Manager Risk and Vulnerability
Manager Research and
Analysis Manager Partnerships Manager Detailed duty statements for all senior staff positions – the AIFDR co-directors, the partnerships manager and the managers of each
work stream are at Annex 5.2. Terms of Reference for the Executive Committee, the Implementation and Technical Working Group,
the International Advisory Panel and the Joint Monitoring Group are at Annex 5.3.
page 28 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
4.4 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
The implementation plan for the AIFDR during Year 0 (to 30 June 2009) is outlined
below. Implementation plans for the AIFDR in Years 1 to 5 will be the responsibility of
the AIFDR Co-Directors. A detailed implementation plan for Year 1 (July 2009 to June
2010) will be produced by the AIFDR and presented to the Executive Committee for their
comments, inputs and endorsement before July 2009.
The AIFDR’s priority in Year 0 is to be operational and to have begun supporting DRR in
Indonesia. This will require:
1. a work plan and a monitoring and evaluation framework for Year 1 of the AIFDR
that reflects AIFDR goals and intended outcomes and pays particular attention to
the critical success factors identified in Section 3.2;
2. the Australian Co-Director, Partnerships Manager and Managers of the three
work streams to be selected and in Jakarta;
3. significant consultation with BNPB and stakeholders to:
a. develop a process for conducting a DRM needs analysis for Indonesia;
b. identify immediate training needs that could be serviced by existing
training packages no later than September 2009.
4. extensive consultation to identify an existing DRR initiative in Indonesia that
could be supported by a realistic disaster scenario;
5. development of protocols, accepted by the Executive committee, that outline how
research and analysis priorities will be determined and how this research will be
commissioned; and
6. delivery of a natural hazard booklet “Natural Hazard Risks in the Asia-Pacific
region” based on research conducted by Geoscience Australia, on behalf of
AusAID, in 2007.
In addition, work will begin in Year 0 on collaboratively developing a strategy for the
AIFDR to achieve its regional aspirations. Development of this strategy will be a priority
for Year 1 of the AIFDR.
page 29 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
4.5 MONITORING AND EVALUATION
A two–person Joint Monitoring Group (JMG) will be established with an independent,
regional Disaster Management specialist and an Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)
Specialist. The JMG has specific analytic functions to conduct secondary review and
reporting against key AIFDR-level strategies and indicators, as well as a quality
assurance role in reviewing the performance of the AIFDR and the effectiveness of the
management and delivery arrangements. The JMG will report to the Executive
Committee. Three visits of the JMG are planned for the Initial Phase: within three
months of inception (for baseline purposes), nine months, and 15 months – at which
stage the Review (see Section 3) will be conducted. Thereafter, the JMG will undertake
six-monthly reviews. TOR for the JMG are included in Annex 5.3. The members will be
selected by GOI and GOA jointly.
It will be the responsibility of the Co-Directors of the AIFDR in Year 0 to ensure that each
work stream has developed a monitoring and evaluation framework and to develop an
overall monitoring and evaluation framework for the AIFDR.
The basic structure and mechanisms for M&E will include:
Reporting on progress and achievements of sub-activities and projects undertaken
by the AIFDR, in a coherent manner against AIFDR-wide objectives by AIFDR
Managers;
Monitoring the nature and extent of changes in decision-making practice and
capacity across the region over time to inform AIFDR planning will be undertaken by
independent research;
An annual report
An independent annual review process; and
Ongoing active learning and adaptation through annual AIFDR consultations with
regional stakeholders.
page 30 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
4.6 SUSTAINABILITY
The design of this Activity has been undertaken with sustainability as a key focus. As
such the following factors that have been incorporated into the design will support the
sustainability beyond the five year timeframe:
1. The Feasibility Study was undertaken that allowed the GOI and other
stakeholders to influence the direction and detail of the design. Moreover, the
Feasibility Study outlined the work of other donors and UN agencies in the DRR
arena and elicited their feedback..
2. Partnership is the key to the design and to sustainability. The AIFDR will be
working not only with national disaster managers in Indonesia and the Region but
closely with other regional and international disaster management service
providers. This will connect the AIFDR with the ongoing effort in disaster
management in the region.
3. The AIFDR will be aligned with Australian, Indonesian, ASEAN and International
policies on DRR and has been developed to address identified needs in
Indonesia and ASEAN/APEC countries.
4. In addition to providing direct capacity building through targeted training
packages the AIFDR will endeavour to support “train the trainer” models to
develop the capacity of Indonesia and the region to conduct their own training
into the future.
5. The AIFDR will encourage collaborative work with Indonesian and regional
technical expertise in order to promote a transfer of skills and expertise.
6. Where possible, tools developed by the AIFDR will use freely available open-
source software that can be used on standard desktop computers. This will
reduce the requirement for recurrent purchasing of software licences or
computers with expensive operating capabilities.
7. The work of the AIFDR will be made freely available to all stakeholders.
page 31 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
Annex 5.1: Glossary/Definitions
Basic Terms in Disaster Management used in the Design Document14
Building codes Ordinances and regulations controlling the design, construction, materials, alteration and occupancy of any structure to insure human safety and welfare. Building codes include both technical and functional standards.
Capacity A combination of all the strengths and resources available within a community, society or organization that can reduce the level of risk, or the effects of a disaster.
Capacity may include physical, institutional, social or economic means as well as skilled personal or collective attributes such as leadership and management. Capacity may also be described as capability.
Capacity building Efforts aimed to develop human skills or societal infrastructures within a community or organization needed to reduce the level of risk.
In extended understanding, capacity building also includes development of institutional, financial, political and other resources, such as technology at different levels and sectors of the society.
Climate change The climate of a place or region is changed if over an extended period (typically decades or longer) there is a statistically significant change in measurements of either the mean state or variability of the climate for that place or region.
Changes in climate may be due to natural processes or to persistent anthropogenic changes in atmosphere or in land use. Note that the definition of climate change used in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change is more restricted, as it includes only those changes which are attributable directly or indirectly to human activity.
14United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction http://www.unisdr.org/eng/library/lib-terminology-eng%20home.htm
page 32 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
Annex 5.1, continued
Disaster A serious disruption of the functioning of a community or a society causing widespread human, material, economic or environmental losses which exceed the ability of the affected community or society to cope using its own resources. A disaster is a function of the risk process. It results from the combination of hazards, conditions of vulnerability and insufficient capacity or measures to reduce the potential negative consequences of risk.
Disaster risk management
The systematic process of using administrative decisions, organization, operational skills and capacities to implement policies, strategies and coping capacities of the society and communities to lessen the impacts of natural hazards and related environmental and technological disasters. This comprises all forms of activities, including structural and non-structural measures to avoid (prevention) or to limit (mitigation and preparedness) adverse effects of hazards.
Disaster risk reduction (disaster reduction)
The conceptual framework of elements considered with the possibilities to minimize vulnerabilities and disaster risks throughout a society, to avoid (prevention) or to limit (mitigation and preparedness) the adverse impacts of hazards, within the broad context of sustainable development.
The disaster risk reduction framework is composed of the following fields of action, as described in ISDR's publication 2002 "Living with Risk: a global review of disaster reduction initiatives", page 23:
Risk awareness and assessment including hazard analysis and vulnerability/capacity analysis;
Knowledge development including education, training, research and information;
Public commitment and institutional frameworks, including organisational, policy, legislation and community action;
Application of measures including environmental management, land-use and urban planning, protection of critical facilities, application of science and technology, partnership and networking, and financial instruments;
Early warning systems including forecasting, dissemination of warnings, preparedness measures and reaction capacities.
page 33 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
Annex 5.1, continued
Early warning The provision of timely and effective information, through identified institutions, that allows individuals exposed to a hazard to take action to avoid or reduce their risk and prepare for effective response.
Early warning systems include a chain of concerns, namely: understanding and mapping the hazard; monitoring and forecasting impending events; processing and disseminating understandable warnings to political authorities and the population, and undertaking appropriate and timely actions in response to the warnings.
Environmental degradation
The reduction of the capacity of the environment to meet social and ecological objectives, and needs.
Potential effects are varied and may contribute to an increase in vulnerability and the frequency and intensity of natural hazards.
Some examples: land degradation, deforestation, desertification, wildland fires, loss of biodiversity, land, water and air pollution, climate change, sea level rise and ozone depletion.
Hazard A potentially damaging physical event, phenomenon or human activity that may cause the loss of life or injury, property damage, social and economic disruption or environmental degradation. Hazards can include latent conditions that may represent future threats and can have different origins: natural (geological, hydrometeorological and biological) or induced by human processes (environmental degradation and technological hazards). Hazards can be single, sequential or combined in their origin and effects. Each hazard is characterised by its location, intensity, frequency and probability.
Mitigation Structural and non-structural measures undertaken to limit the adverse impact of natural hazards, environmental degradation and technological hazards.
Natural hazards Natural processes or phenomena occurring in the biosphere that may constitute a damaging event.
Natural hazards can be classified by origin namely: geological, hydrometeorological or biological. Hazardous events can vary in magnitude or intensity, frequency, duration, area of extent, speed of onset, spatial dispersion and temporal spacing.
Preparedness Activities and measures taken in advance to ensure effective response to the impact of hazards, including the issuance of timely and effective early warnings and the temporary evacuation of people and property from threatened locations.
page 34 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
Annex 5.1, continued
Prevention Activities to provide outright avoidance of the adverse impact of hazards and means to minimize related environmental, technological and biological disasters.
Depending on social and technical feasibility and cost/benefit considerations, investing in preventive measures is justified in areas frequently affected by disasters. In the context of public awareness and education, related to disaster risk reduction changing attitudes and behaviour contribute to promoting a "culture of prevention".
Recovery Decisions and actions taken after a disaster with a view to restoring or improving the pre-disaster living conditions of the stricken community, while encouraging and facilitating necessary adjustments to reduce disaster risk.
Recovery (rehabilitation and reconstruction) affords an opportunity to develop and apply disaster risk reduction measures.
Relief / response The provision of assistance or intervention during or immediately after a disaster to meet the life preservation and basic subsistence needs of those people affected. It can be of an immediate, short-term, or protracted duration.
Resilience / resilient The capacity of a system, community or society potentially exposed to hazards to adapt, by resisting or changing in order to reach and maintain an acceptable level of functioning and structure. This is determined by the degree to which the social system is capable of organizing itself to increase its capacity for learning from past disasters for better future protection and to improve risk reduction measures.
Risk The probability of harmful consequences, or expected losses (deaths, injuries, property, livelihoods, economic activity disrupted or environment damaged) resulting from interactions between natural or human-induced hazards and vulnerable conditions.
Conventionally risk is expressed by the notation Risk = Hazards x Vulnerability. Some disciplines also include the concept of exposure to refer particularly to the physical aspects of vulnerability.
Beyond expressing a possibility of physical harm, it is crucial to recognize that risks are inherent or can be created or exist within social systems. It is important to consider the social contexts in which risks occur and that people therefore do not necessarily share the same perceptions of risk and their underlying causes.
page 35 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
Annex 5.1, continued
Risk assessment/analysis
A methodology to determine the nature and extent of risk by analysing potential hazards and evaluating existing conditions of vulnerability that could pose a potential threat or harm to people, property, livelihoods and the environment on which they depend. The process of conducting a risk assessment is based on a review of both the technical features of hazards such as their location, intensity, frequency and probability; and also the analysis of the physical, social, economic and environmental dimensions of vulnerability and exposure, while taking particular account of the coping capabilities pertinent to the risk scenarios.
Sustainable development
Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. It contains within it two key concepts: the concept of "needs", in particular the essential needs of the world's poor, to which overriding priority should be given; and the idea of limitations imposed by the state of technology and social organization on the environment's ability to meet present and the future needs. (Brundtland Commission, 1987).
Sustainable development is based on socio-cultural development, political stability and decorum, economic growth and ecosystem protection, which all relate to disaster risk reduction.
Vulnerability The conditions determined by physical, social, economic, and environmental factors or processes, which increase the susceptibility of a community to the impact of hazards.
For positive factors, which increase the ability of people to cope with hazards, see definition of capacity.
page 36 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
ANNEX 5.2 POSITION DESCRIPTIONS AUSTRALIAN CO-DIRECTOR
Provide strategic direction for the AIFDR and advice to the Australia-Indonesia Executive Committee
Ensure coherence of programs in accordance with the objectives of the AIFDR.
Maintain quality and timeliness of reporting to stakeholders
Ensure adherence to Australian objectives and accountability requirements
Manage the staff and financial resources of the AIFDR
Ensure partnerships are established and maintained with key disaster management institutions in the Region and extend the reach of the AIFDR’s scientific and analytical capacities
With the Indonesian Co-Director, by 2011, scope development of a centre/ institute for disaster reduction that is accessible and internationally recognised as a provider of tertiary level training in disaster management, in partnership with selected tertiary education institutions,
INDONESIAN CO-DIRECTOR
Provide strategic direction for the AIFDR and advice to the Australia-Indonesia Executive Committee
Ensure coherence of programs in accordance with the objectives of the AIFDR.
Maintain quality and timeliness of reporting to stakeholders
Ensure programming meets GoI objectives at both national and sub-national levels
Facilitate cooperative activities with relevant Indonesian agencies
Work with regional organisations and programs to showcase Indonesian experience across the region
With the Australian Co-Director, by 2011, scope development of a centre/ institute for disaster reduction that is accessible and internationally recognised as a provider of tertiary level training in disaster management, in partnership with selected tertiary education institutions,
page 37 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
RISK & VULNERABILITY MANAGER
Lead the development and adaptation of appropriate science and technology to
develop realistic disaster scenarios for Indonesia and the region Foster collaboration with regional disaster management experts and technical
centres Provide advice and producing tools to assist disaster managers in Indonesia and
the region
TRAINING & OUTREACH MANAGER
Provide overall coordination of the output of the Training and Outreach
component. Lead a collaborative needs assessment for DRM in Indonesia
Arrange the piloting and conduct exercising of civilian disaster managers Liaise and manage the relationship with training providers and other disaster
management organisations to achieve synergies Identify training, advocacy and support options for Indonesia and the region
including disaster stores and assessment team training
RESEARCH & ANAYLSIS MANAGER
With the guidance of the AIFDR’s Executive Committee, Implementation Working
Group and Director, to liaise with regional disaster management bodies to identify key areas in which to identify and commission targeted research and analytical reports on emerging issues
To establish linkages with academic institutions and research think-tanks in
Indonesia and the region more broadly on disaster management issues
To organize and arrange study awards at various academic levels in Indonesia, Australia and the region
To disseminate reports and research widely and in a user-friendly way.
page 38 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
PARTNERSHIPS MANAGER
Build partnerships with BNBP (the Indonesian National Board for Disaster Management), APEC and ASEAN; and with the United Nations, particularly UNOCHA (the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs), the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies) and regional disaster management organizations
Schedule coordinated training and support opportunities
Develop and manage the AIFDR website
page 39 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
ANNEX 5.3 TERMS OF REFERENCE (JOINT MONITORING GROUP, EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE, IMPLEMENTATION, TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP AND THE INTERNATIONAL ADVISORY PANEL)
1. JOINT MONITORING GROUP To be developed
2. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Membership Co-Chairs:
Senior BNPB representative Senior AusAID representative in Indonesia
Members: Senior representatives of –
BAPPENAS DPLU DFAT Geoscience Australia
Others should be invited to attend if their expertise will improve decision making on agenda items. Secretary: AIFDR Director – with support from AIFDR staff as necessary. Terms of Reference The Executive Committee will meet quarterly, with the first meeting occurring prior to the scheduled opening of the AIFDR in April 2009. The Executive Committee will oversight AIFDR management and provide the AIFDR with strategic policy guidance. The Executive Committee will formally approve the AIFDR’s annual work programs. The Executive Committee will guide the AIFDR on how it can support and/or carry out activities in the following areas in particular: Long term strategic analysis that will inform more effective efforts to reduce disaster
risk Advocating for the science and data collection needed to support disaster
risk reduction Promoting the coordination of disaster reduction and response efforts, including the
building of national capacities to self-manage disasters and improve operational coherence
Promoting realistic exercising, including better integration of military actors in civilian-led exercising and planning
page 40 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
Development of a high-standard, accredited learning progression for disaster managers that seeks to improve their professional skills and accountability
Beginning a dialogue with the UN on the new disaster management paradigm in Asia.
3. IMPLEMENTATION AND TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP Membership Chair:
BNPB Deputy for Prevention and Preparedness Members:
Indonesian scientific expert(s) AusAID representative AIFDR Risk and Vulnerability Manager
Other Government agencies and experts, including from participating UN/ regional agencies, should be invited as necessary to consider agenda items that fall within their areas of responsibility or expertise. Secretary: AIFDR Partnerships Manager – with support from other AIFDR staff as necessary. Terms of Reference The Implementation and Technical Working (ITW) Group will aim to meet monthly, or more regularly if necessary. It will hold its first meeting as soon as possible in 2009. The ITW Group will provide more detailed technical oversight and guidance. In particular, the Group will provide guidance to the AIFDR on the development of work programs and advice to the Executive Committee on these work programs. The Group should support the AIFDR and the Executive Committee in areas such as: Advising on emerging threats including climate change, pandemics and the impact of
food and fuel insecurity in the region Assisting to identify the scientific tools and expertise necessary to more effectively
quantify hazards in Asia and compute risk based on exposure and vulnerability Advising on efforts to more effectively link scientific products to the development of
contingency plans, emergency preparedness measures and mitigation strategies that translate to a reduction in risk at the community level
Supporting the integration of standard multilateral response mechanisms, such as the UN’s Disaster Assessment and Coordination system, the International Search and Rescue Advisory Group guidelines and the IFRC Guidelines for the Domestic Facilitation and Regulation of International Disaster Relief and Initial Recovery Assistance into domestic disaster management arrangements
Refocussing efforts to build national capacity to manage disasters rather than continuing to disproportionately support the expansion of external surge capacity.
page 41 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
page 42 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
4. INTERNATIONAL ADVISORY PANEL
Membership Chair
International DRR expert Members
Senior DRR expert Senior risk and vulnerability scientist Expert development educator
Secretary
AIFDR Director Terms of Reference The Executive Committee will aim to meet yearly, in Jakarta and to spend two to three days with the AIFDR Director and Managers to learn of their progress and their challenges. The International Committee will report on its assessment of the progress of the AIFDR and its advice to the Executive Committee of the AIFDR. The first visit of the International Advisory Committee should occur in March 2010. On the basis of its knowledge of international best practice the International Advisory Committee’s role will be to advise the AIFDR on its
o progress to date o plans for the following year o meeting challenges o international opportunities for partnership
ANNEX 5.5 Hyogo Framework for Action15
The Hyogo Framework was adopted by 168 countries, including Australia, the Philippines and Papua New Guinea, in January 2005 at the UN World Conference on Disasters in Kobe, Japan. The Hyogo Framework outlines a commitment to a substantial reduction of disaster losses, in lives as well as the social, economic and environmental assets of communities and countries and lays five priorities to achieve this:.
1. Ensure that disaster risk reduction is a national and a local priority with a strong institutional basis for implementation:
Countries that develop policy, legislative and institutional frameworks for disaster risk reduction and that are able to develop and track progress through specific and measurable indicators have greater capacity to manage risks and to achieve widespread consensus for, engagement in and compliance with disaster risk reduction measures across all sectors of society.
2. Identify, assess and monitor disaster risks and enhance early warning:
The starting point for reducing disaster risk and for promoting a culture of disaster resilience lies in the knowledge of the hazards and the physical, social, economic and environmental vulnerabilities to disasters that most societies face, and of the ways in which hazards and vulnerabilities are changing in the short and long term, followed by action taken on the basis of that knowledge.
3. Use knowledge, innovation and education to build a culture of safety and resilience at all levels:
Disasters can be substantially reduced if people are well informed and motivated towards a culture of disaster prevention and resilience, which in turn requires the collection, compilation and dissemination of relevant knowledge and information on hazards, vulnerabilities and capacities.
4. Reduce the underlying risk factors:
Disaster risks related to changing social, economic, environmental conditions and land use, and the impact of hazards associated with geological events, weather, water, climate variability and climate change, are addressed in sector development planning and programmes as well as in post-disaster situations.
5. Strengthen disaster preparedness for effective response at all levels:
At times of disaster, impacts and losses can be substantially reduced if authorities, individuals and communities in hazard-prone areas are well prepared and ready to act and are equipped with the knowledge and capacities for effective disaster management.
15 http://www.unisdr.org/eng/hfa/hfa.htm
page 43 – DRAFT – as at 16/02/09
top related